Standard times describe machines that no longer exist.
The cycle times in the system were entered years ago. The plant has since learned that one line runs a recipe faster and another needs longer changeovers — and none of it reached the plan.
PLANNING & SCHEDULING · THE LIVE PLAN
Most plans are accurate exactly once: the moment before the first machine disagrees with them.
THE SHORT ANSWER
Production planning sets what to make and when; scheduling assigns it to machines, people and hours. The gap that hurts is between them and reality — a breakdown, a late material, a machine that is slower on this recipe. Useful scheduling knows each machine's real behaviour, sees the maintenance risk, and replans as soon as reality moves, proposing the new sequence for approval.
WHY THE PLAN IS WRONG BY WEDNESDAY
The cycle times in the system were entered years ago. The plant has since learned that one line runs a recipe faster and another needs longer changeovers — and none of it reached the plan.
A machine heading for a failure is scheduled at full capacity because planning and maintenance run in separate systems and meet in a weekly meeting.
When reality moves, the recovery plan is rebuilt by hand, under pressure, with the knowledge of whoever happens to be on shift. That knowledge leaves at 18:00.
The market sells a better planning screen.
WHAT ATHERYA DOES INSTEAD
Times come from the plant's own history per machine and per recipe, including the shift effects everyone suspected and nobody had measured.
Predicted failures and required windows enter the same model as orders and capacity, so the schedule stops promising hours that are about to disappear.
When a stop, a delay or a material shortage changes feasibility, Atherya proposes a revised sequence and shows what it gave up to protect what matters.
It replans autonomously and executes nothing on its own. A human approves, and every approval leaves an auditable trail.
READ FROM ONE REAL PLANT — BEFORE INSTALL
Rubber moulding, northern Italy. Figures from a real onboarding, read from existing data before any installation. Anything beyond them is a scenario, and we declare it as a scenario.
WHAT SCHEDULING LEARNS FROM A REAL READ
Most predictive maintenance tools score signals. Atherya builds an operational memory of the plant first, then reasons on top of it — with the evidence in plain sight and the decision left to a person.
Every event, anomaly, intervention and shift becomes shared memory. What was a log yesterday is experience tomorrow, and the model reads new signals against it.
Not just "anomaly detected", but when it already happened, how similar it was, how it evolved and which action worked. The senior maintainer's memory, available to everyone.
Machine defects, weak points, how the crew actually works and the environment around the line. A deviation that is normal for that machine, that shift or that season stays quiet.
FMEA, manuals and procedures become an active part of the reasoning: causes, effects, sensors and suggested actions are connected, instead of sitting in a document nobody opens.
Every alert arrives with the signals involved, the comparable history, the failure mode and a confidence level. Data, interpretation and decision stay separate and verifiable.
Atherya does not stop at the warning: it proposes the maintenance window against real orders and shifts, and replans when something changes. Nothing is applied until a person approves it.
It works on PLC, SCADA, MES, ERP, maintenance records and feedback as they are — fragmented and legacy included. Sensors are added only where no existing signal carries the degradation.
Maintenance, production and planning read the same operational state, so a predicted failure immediately becomes a scheduling question instead of a separate dashboard.
QUESTIONS, ANSWERED
Planning decides what to produce, in what quantity and by when, against demand and capacity. Scheduling turns that into a concrete sequence on specific machines, shifts and people. Planning answers 'what and when', scheduling answers 'where, in what order, by whom'.
Because they are built on nominal times and a static view of capacity. Breakdowns, changeovers, late materials and per-machine differences all move the real constraint, and a plan that cannot replan quickly becomes fiction.
No. Atherya sits on top of ERP, MES, historian and CMMS, reads what they already hold and returns a plan proposal into the same working process.
It replans autonomously but executes nothing without your sign-off: it proposes the revised plan, shows the trade-off and waits for approval.
The first read works on historical data, so the behaviour model exists before any installation. What changes then depends on the plant; we present expected gains as scenarios, never as measured results.
YOUR PLANT · YOUR DATA · THE PROOF
Send an export: we return the per-machine behaviour your plan has been missing.
Discover Atherya